Posts Tagged ‘christianity’

Do We Really Want To Live Like This?

Wednesday, October 18th, 2017

One of the worst Cuck Jobs you’ll ever hear from the pulpit happens when your contemporary Reverend Iwanna SWPLToo opens The Good Book to Acts 10:9-18. After sitting through purge-and-vomit instead fire-and-brimstone, I wanted to log into to my training program at work and see if could claim that homily as my annual diworsity brainwashing session and skip the pablum from HR.

About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.” “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.” The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.” This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven. While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon’s house was and stopped at the gate. They called out, asking if Simon who was known as Peter was staying there.

You see, Reverand Iwanna SWPLToo seems to believe we just need to take anyone into the church who claims to want in the door. That excluding them on any grounds makes you a sinner that fails to understand Christianity. Putting a high-pass filter in place would lead us straight down the broad thoroughfare of damnation that AC/DC sings about so nicely. He then informed us if we didn’t all agree with this message he would take his act back home to Arlington, Texas. I figured it was nice he favored open borders and free movement and hoped to someday soon bid him a fond farewell while the church looked for a minister who could read The New Testament and not imbue it with Progressive, New-Fangled Amorality.

So what’s wrong with the SWPL interpretation of this old tale from the scriptures? According to Der Spiegel, nothing the old East German Stasi couldn’t stitch right up. I mean once you’ve decided everyone, literally everyone, regardless of their standards of personal conduct are welcome, you get pretty much what you tolerate. It’s just plain common sense to ask if God would call sepsis clean. Maybe God would call intestinal rotifers and cancer tumors clean as well. It was pretty harsh of Old Jesus to discriminate against Legion for having an excremental résumé. He did ask Christ nicely not to render him homeless.

How would the secret police get involved in a theological discussion with Communism now consigned to corrupt, declining institutions like The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York? It gets involved once Reverend Iwanna SWPLToo’s vision completely dominates a society. You see Germany deigns to assume anything that crap and take a walk has been called clean by whatever they believe in since Nietzsche signed Gnon’s death certificate. So as the old game show trope goes, “Show ’em what they win, Dom Pardo!”

The assassin from Breitscheidplatz, Anis Amri, murdered twelve people and injured almost 100 more. Many of them are traumatized to the present day, some still in the hospital, some will remain nursing care for their whole lives. Could the attack have been prevented? In his report, former Federal Prosecutor Jost assumes at least that Amri could have been arrested in the summer or autumn of 2016 with “high probability” – if the police and the public prosecutors had done their work properly.

Pretty typical conclusion. Better police work would prevent criminals from doing crime. How does this even implicitly indict our true Cuck-Christian duty to !CELEBRATE! diversity? Umm, let’s discuss what proper police work has to entail in order to run the managerial state that can manage diversity.

The LKA observed Amri only for a few weeks. And even though the Berlin police in the meantime considered him to be the most urgent case in the capital, she observed the Islamists only sporadically during this period. Jost is sober: “All observations are limited to the weekdays Monday to Friday, even during the weeks in which Amri ranks first among the” Berliners “. On weekends and holidays, no observers take place.” The ex-federal prosecutor concludes that the findings of Amris’s Islamist activities alone would not have sufficed to put him under investigation. However, from his point of view, it would have given him a great opportunity to get him out of circulation because of drug trafficking.

So my questions are not whether the German neo-Stazis should have received better direction from Zee Merkel’s totally non-Communist politburo. My question is why do we allow elements into Western Society that require us to emulate the failures of the CCCP to avoid having them deliberately and maliciously blow us up or run us over at a Christmas Market? Who in their right mind wants to live like that? Acts 10 aside, we were told by a higher authority than Saint Luke that you can judge a tree by its fruits and that those who don’t bear the desired fruit for the Kingdom of Heaven are tossed into the fire and burned.

We have a theological duty to to read our scripture properly. The injunction is against rejecting that which God made clean. Where does Acts or any other book of the New Testament claim everything is de facto clean? It doesn’t. Reverend Iwanna SWPLToo is deliberately implying valid philosophical induction without an effective base case. Accepting Cornelius the highly decent and squared away Roman Centurian is several standard deviations away from accepting anything that walks out of Left Point with a commission as a 2LT. Peter knew it. Rev. SWPLToo and Angela Merkel know it well. Acts 10:9-18 is being used as a normative bait and switch. Buy not the used mechanical conveyance using an internal combustion engine from any preacher quoting Chapter 10 of Acts.

Why the dishonesty from people we should otherwise be able to rely upon and trust? Maybe I asked the wrong question when I asked who in their right minds would want to live in a society that requires a Stasi? The real question here is who benefits from deracinating a society and culture until it requires a Stasi. Importing fear imports the need for control. The need for control empowers the tyrant. The society that accepts literally everything can only be preserved in the end by a despotism. It can only exist under the baleful, watching glare of The Lidless Eye.


Saturday, August 12th, 2017

Another trope emerges: the notion that “Judeo-Christian” refers to Christians who have adopted Jewish values. This is not historically correct, nor linguistically sensible, although it may make a political trope of note.

We can see this by consulting a reputable source about the English language, namely the Oxford English Dictionary:

Note the definition of “Jewish” for this prefix, with the note that it forms combinations that imply (1) of Jewish origin and/or (2) “Jewish and,” as in Judaeo-Christian (modern spelling: Judeo-Christian).

Now look a little further down and you see the word for a Christian who has adopted a Jewish worldview:

If you want to use a term meaning “a Christian who follows a Jewish version of Christianity,” the correct term would be Judaist.

Now let us look further at a more popular and slightly less precise dictionary, Merriam-Webster, which gives us the following definition of Judeo-Christian:

At this point, we see the meaning of the term: Judaism and Christianity shared the Old Testament and a common set of values derived from the Ten Commandments, so Judeo-Christian refers to the set of what is shared in common between Judaism and Christianity. In common political use, it implies the sum of the two, since they are seen as having a common root and being generally compatible.

Neurotic Leftist Jews, like neurotic Leftist Indo-Europeans, are an inversion of Judaism, which is a racial compact between God and His people (“the chosen ones”). For a Jew to advocate diversity, miscegenation or intermarriage is completely nonsensical, although there are many Jews and Christians who encourage exactly this.

If you want to attack Judaism, you can use the term Judaist to refer to someone with Judaic values. More sensibly, you might attack the more general term, which would be materialism, or the idea that pragmatism — social and financial success, compromise, popularity — is more important than striving for virtue.

Christianity And Paganism

Wednesday, July 12th, 2017

You can tell that humanity is a scared and disorganized herd of monkeys because there is never a single convincing explanation for any event, even the most important ones to our present day. Consider for example Christianity.

The official narrative used to be that Christianity unified Europe and moved it away from the pagans, who were prone to anal sex and other weird and promiscuous practices, and that Christianity formed the basis of our modern time, including The Renaissance™ and The Enlightenment.™

A counter-narrative arose which said that Christianity was an invader, that it oppressed the pagans and destroyed them in service to moneyed interests, and that it then erased evidence of the superior past and injected its mediocrity in place of the pagan wisdom. In this view, Christianity was the corruption of the West and gave rise to Leftism.

Maybe both have some truth to them. Let me retell the story:

  1. Wealth is death. Any society which becomes wealthy faces a trap: its old purpose is now gone, since it has conquered that which stood against it, and now it needs to find a new affirmative purpose or entropy takes over. But, this is difficult, since that purpose needs to be arbitrary and immutable, yet qualitative, which means most people simply do not understand it, and it is impossible to get a consensus together. Either it is imposed by force, or it does not happen. Without purpose, society turns inward, and focuses on human individuals and their desires instead of the ecosystem they form together that allows civilization to happen.
  2. The herd arises. When a civilization becomes wealthy and loses purpose, and then turns toward a facilitative society or one geared toward fulfilling the needs of its individuals, it quickly produces a herd of individualists, or those forming a collective of individuals dedicated toward the principle that every individual — and each thinks only of himself when saying this — should be forcibly included in society. They want to clear away restrictions against their personal participation, so they come up with the idea of “equality,” or that every individual should be equally included. This means that no objections against any one of them can stand, with a few exceptions that rapidly dwindle in number.
  3. The herd controls. The herd uses control, or the idea of regulating people equally by method in order to eliminate dissent, in order to force other people to accept the lie (that each person should be included regardless of abilities, genetics, class/caste, character or past behavior) so that they avoid the truth (that people are different and belong to a hierarchy in emulation of the order of nature). The goal of the herd is to diminish virtue, or the desire to do what is right/good independent of whether personal reward in the short-term arrives in response. The herd therefore likes anything that accomplishes its goal of breaking down organization, order, distinctions, hierarchy and virtue: pedosexuality, drugs, promiscuity, atheism, communism, anarchism, whatever.
  4. The herd seized Christianity. Naturally sane people, back when Europe was pagan, were pagan. Why were they pagan? Paganism is an outpouring of culture, not a third party known as “religion,” and so to be German (for example) was to have certain customs, practices, calendar, cuisine, beliefs and rituals… most of which we would now consider spiritual or religious, but for them were just part of being German. This is why paganism makes no sense as a religion; it is, like conservatism, a folkway and as such has no ideology or over-riding and underlying central theme, but instead is a collection of memories, experiences, stories, and other fragments of wisdom. For this reason, the sane people were pagan, and the herd saw this new foreign religion as a way to dominate these naturally sane people.
  5. The herd reprogrammed Christianity. The herd uses everything as a means-to-the-end of its own power; instead of using an ends-over-means analysis, where all things must serve a purpose, the herd short-circuits this decision and makes its own power the only end and regulates means/methods in order to do this. For the herd, Christianity was a property which could be renovated and made into a weapon. Contrasting this was the natural adoption of Christianity: as a written religion, and one of a single layer of interpretation instead of the many depths and obscurities of paganism or reality itself, Christianity had the power to unite people. And so, many switched over to it, and at the same time that the herd was infiltrating, the good people were pushing back and making something great of Christianity. Many inspired acts and works came of this process, but the herd won in the end because its message was simpler and thus, more popular.
  6. The herd hijacks everything. Once upon a time, there was a strong European tradition of being experimentalist, or willing to take on new thoughts and test them out. To the herd, this was a powerful symbol and signal of intelligence and self-confidence, so they promptly hijacked it, and turned it into liberalism — a bias for new ideas over working ones — and bohemianism, or a desire for behaviors which flaunt cultural norms and prioritize selfishness. They did the same thing to Christianity, turning a reverent religion (a Judaic interpretation of Greek and Hindu ideas) into a personal religion, at which point it became another adornment for the individual, and its real message — that the ideal is measured in terms of consequences, not feelings — was forgotten.
  7. Christianity became a pretext. If you want to eliminate your enemies, set up an Official Truth™ and then use that as a backward justification for crushing all who do not obey it; in this case, it was simple to categorize any dissidents from the herd thinking as “pagans” and then have the mob of well-meaning but thoughtless people without accountability crush those “pagans.” Since many of the sanest saw religion as a type of ideology, and preferred to stick to their folkways, many were “pagan,” but did not see it as a type of competing ideology as the new Christians did. For the pagans, their beliefs were simply a description of the world, and the possible causes, effects and consequences which confronted human decision-makers. But those ideas — realism — opposed what the herd wanted, and so it used Christianity as a pretext to crush the dissenters.
  8. The struggle continued. Most people who got involved with Christianity were normal people who thought that religious guidance might be a good thing. Some became true believers in the religion itself. This explains why Christianity was such a mixed bag: some good, and some evil. But this makes sense, given that a religion is comprised of humans, and they approach it with different motivations. Just because they join a faith does not automatically render them uniform with the same goals and principles. Instead, like civilization itself, it provides an aegis under which individual accountability takes a back seat to membership in the group, and often by distributing negative effects among the group, protects the aberrant individual from responsibility, and so increases the presence of deviancy over time. Paganism did not have this sense of group unity because it was not ideological.

And so, we are left with the usual moral ambiguity of human life. Saying “Christianity is bad” is as nonsense as saying “Christianity is good,” because Christianity is composed of individuals, and the quality of interpretation varies with them. In fact, the people who have something sensible to say would most likely be saying the same thing under Christianity, German paganism, Greco-Roman paganism or Hinduism.

If the past hundred years have done anything, it is to integrate some of those old pagan folkways into Christianity, both subverting its fringes and strengthening its core idea of the impossibility of separation from God. From Old World Witchcraft by Raven Grimassi:

Old World witchcraft is glimpsed in shadow because the shadow’s edge is the threshold of the portal to the inside. Stepping across the threshold and coming back again are what brings about realization. They reveal the difference between witchcraft as something to do on the weekend and witchcraft as something much larger and greater than the witch. Old World witchcraft is empowering and transformative. It is more than a philosophy and a self-image; it is how we interact with our connection to, and relationship with, all things.

There is a reason why witchcraft is traditionally linked to the night and intimately connected to the moon. In a mystical sense the moon is a form and is formless at the same time. From earth’s perspective the moon appears to change shape in the night sky and even disappears entirely for three nights each lunar cycle. Its shape is not constant like that of the sun and stars. Therefore, it becomes a metaphor for altered states of consciousness. To stand beneath the moon in a state of receptivity is to invite the “otherworld” into our mind, body, and spirit.

Witchcraft, paganism and the occult group together because they are informal religions based on the idea of natural balance instead of human order. That is to say that humans fit within a natural order, instead of asserting an order of their own over nature. This concept is also found in Christianity, but under-emphasized because of the need to promote a personal morality.

This shows us the distinctions between modern Christianity and pagan faiths:

  1. Exoteric. Christianity is written, like the law or theory, with the idea that it has only a single level of interpretation. If people read the text, they may argue over the finer points, but the basics have been communicated to them and they can follow the religion as if an ideology or symbol. This means however, that since no depth is expected, anyone who masters the basics can then twist the religion in any direction they want, and selectively cite it because the meanings of each passage are clear and therefore can be addressed in isolation, instead of as part of a tapestry of obscure ideas designed for those with the natural capacity and long-term dedication to pursue them.
  2. Personal. If Christianity has a fatal flaw, it is its individualism. Many people (idiots) confuse the core of the West with individualism, when really it is a contrary principle, which is “reflection” or contemplating the world and self to figure out how they work, instead of taking the self at face value and assuming that it is more important than the world. Christian morality is concerned with the rightness of actions in the context of the rules of a god, instead of effects in reality, for the most part, and this is a weakness because people then focus on avoiding “bad” behaviors but do not dedicate themselves toward good ones on a level above that of the individual.
  3. Foreign. To my mind, this is what will doom Christianity in the next hundred years: we cannot hide the fact that it was invented by people speaking a very different language in the very different area of the world known as the middle east. Maybe the Jews were European, but evidence suggests they were at least hybrids shortly after the events of the Bible, so they are not a fit with those of us who are European in descent.

It is for this reason that many are tending toward exploration of Christianity at its more logically-consistent extremes, much like the orthodox Catholics or Bruce Charlton pursuing Mormonism. They recognize that the core doctrines of Christianity are under assault and thus deviating from their Greek/Hindu origins into more Asiatic ideas which were originally at the fringe but become the core.

In my view, it makes the most sense to simply sit out this war. There is a lot to like in Christianity, and most of that comes from the Greeks, Nords, Germans, Hindus, Hittites, and others who contributed to its core. At the same time, it is committing suicide because, having achieved supremacy, it had no second act and so has passed into irrelevance as distrust of organized systems has risen.

Within a century, Christianity will not exist, having been replaced by an informal faith more like our pagan origins simply because people do not trust formalized faiths. The Bible however will live on as a resource used by those people, and it is likely that the churches will again become sacred places. European greatness existed before Christ, but will carry him forward into a new era.

Why The Churches Failed

Saturday, June 24th, 2017

Christian attendance at churches is dropping, as is the share of Christians in the world religion market. Some industry sources offer insight into the collapse of this once-thriving religion:

I have witnessed both kinds of disaffiliation: ex-mainliners leaving because their churches were so insipid, and ex-evangelicals leaving because they could not reconcile conservative faith with science, critical thinking, or the contemporary world.

…Here is my very tentative proposal for eight other reasons:

–Prosperity and affluence distract people from regular church attendance and reduce a strong sense of need to be in church, gradually eroding not just church attendance but Christian identity.

–The pre-modern claims of traditional Christian faith appear increasingly incredible to postmodern Americans. It has been a very long time since a majority of cultural elites found Christianity’s supernatural claims, for example, to be credible. These elites dominate our culture.

–Hypocrisies and conflicts in church, when they (inevitably) erupt, don’t just drive people to other churches, as in the past, but sometimes take them out of Christianity altogether.

–The fading of cultural Christianity means that fewer and fewer Americans feel any cultural or familial expectation to be in church or practice Christianity. “It was good enough for grandpa” just doesn’t cut it anymore.

–American Christianity is not producing many compelling leaders, and thus the average church (as well as the Church writ large) is not especially inspiring or visionary. Many ministers play it safe in order to keep their jobs, or are simply not that talented.

–The collapse of any protection of Sunday from recreation and work, together with the gig economy, means many people are working or otherwise engaged on Sunday.

–It is harder for parents to pass the faith onto their children in a wired world in which parental influence is in decline.

–Evangelism is dead. No one really knows how to “share the Christian faith” any more in a way that connects with people, and many Christians have stopped trying.

This article seems on-point, but to it we must add another compelling reason: Christianity failed to stop the decline when people depended on it to do so. Instead, it seemed to join the decline as its leaders tried to make it simpler and more accessible to reach more people. Once democratized, it failed because people can get that same experience anywhere else. Church is no longer unique and as a result, has no necessary function in the daily lives of people.

Instead, it too has been ceded to the Left. Once it went down the path of dumbing down, the smart people fled, and idiots were only too happy to surge into the gap and take over, switching the choir to a rock band and the message from self-sacrifice to self-expression. Nothing kills a church like being a place that smart people attend once and then run to the hills.

In my generation, no one goes to church, although we are proportionately more religious in feeling than the previous generation. They go to church because they sense that it is right to do, but we stay at home and try to reach a God who seems to have forsaken this planet, but whom (Whom?) we suspect still loves us and cares about the outcome even down here in this modern wasteland.

If Christianity wants to succeed, it should do what the Orthosphere counsels: stop trying to be like all the other kids. Offer a unique experience that can be found nowhere else. Get out of politics and social commentary. Focus on saving souls and instilling moral awareness, even if the sheep might wake up and realize their civilization is collapsing. Connect people to the divine.

Cucked Southern Baptists Want More Dead Conservatives

Wednesday, June 21st, 2017

The Alt-Right rises. What would Jeebus do? According to the Seduccees, Pharisees and Moneychangers of the Southern Baptist Convention 17, it might not be very nice. They passed a resolution explicitely condeming the Alt-Right. Feel.The.Bern. To see just what happens to sinners in the hands of homosexual church bureaucrats, here you are…

RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention, meeting in Phoenix, Arizona,
June 13–14, 2017, decry every form of racism, including alt-right white supremacy, as antithetical to the
Gospel of Jesus Christ; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we denounce and repudiate white supremacy and every form of racial and ethnic
hatred as of the devil; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we acknowledge that we still must make progress in rooting out any remaining forms
of intentional or unintentional racism in our midst; and be it further

RESOLVED, That we earnestly pray, both for those who advocate racist ideologies and those who are
thereby deceived, that they may see their error through the light of the Gospel, repent of these hatreds,
and come to know the peace and love of Christ through redeemed fellowship in the Kingdom of God,
which is established from every nation, tribe, people, and language.

The ignorance of these cuckservative Never-Trumpers with regards to the Alt-Right is appalling. Here is the poor level of historical understanding that underpinned the resolution aimed at continuing the 2016 GOP Primary half a year after the GOP candidate they didn’t want to see win had been inaugurated as POTUS.

One attendee tweeted the resolution committee did the right thing when they declined to bring the alt-right resolution before the group in the first place: “The res committee and their response is exactly right. It will only be criticized by race baiters and ppl pushing left-wing social issues.” Faithful and vocal Southern Baptist leaders fell on both sides of Trump’s candidacy, with several joining his evangelical advisory board and others speaking out against him. After the election, Moore ended up apologizing to fellow members of his denomination for what some read as insults against all Trump voters, including the majority of white evangelicals who cast ballots for him. “It is, in part, a concern that alt-right will be a label applied to non-racist conservatives who, for example, simply voted for Donald Trump,” said Ed Stetzer, executive director of the Billy Graham Center for Evangelism at Wheaton College, who blogged on the resolution for CT. “However, I think that concern is past its time—the alt-right is the klan without the robes, and Southern Baptists need to speak up on it.”

Crap like this is why any Conservative who thinks the SBC, the moderate GOP blogosphere, or any other vestige of the establishmentarian GOP will keep you off the Proggy train to Triblinka, is barm-smitten and delusional. With friends like these, you need to own more handguns. You see, they just called anyone who claims the label of Alt-Right satanic. They also lumped all Identarians, Ethnic Nationalists, Immigration Restrictionists and pretty much anyone two steps to the Right of Lindsey Graham as bigots.* Labeling is the first step to consigning those people to the Basket of Deplorables. Who needs Hillary and The Resistance when you have these back-knifing SNL Church Ladies?

The Devil, you see, is nowhere near as much of a joke as this year’s SBC makes him out to be. Calling someone satanic is way, way worse than being irate with them for diagreeing with one of your arrogantly dogmatic opinions. When somebody is satanic, they need to be killed. It’s not complicated. It is heresy to let a satanist walk around loose. But then, again, once your church has decided to start a mosque-building program to promote “Religious Liberty” and “Niceness”, it doesn’t take too much longer to get down to issuing a few fatwas.

And satire, aside; they really are building mosques while they simultaneously attempt to ban the Alt-Right.

“It’s good when we can join hands with … folks we are sometimes on the other side of,” said Brent Walker, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty. Those folks include the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and the International Mission Board, both agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention. The National Association of Evangelicals is also supporting the mosque-building case.

They obviously feel this way because Islam is the Religion of Peace and Alt-Righters go around shooting political leaders because of stuff they’ve read on the Internet. Oh wait. That totally isn’t correct. These guys are Cuck-Christians. They think they can play DR3 by showing everyone they can hate the Alt-Right even harder than Bernie Sanders. The Virtue Signal is visible, high above Gotham City. There is a certain passage in The Good Book that the SBC ignores, but that the Alt-Right gets reminded of pretty much every damn day. (Matthew 10: 21-23)

And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.

Another one the SBC17 may well want bone up on is this one. (Matthew 23:27).

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.

And this is what these people are. Virtue Signalers that flatter the losers and reprobates in order to play to the lowest common denominator of human motivations. They lack the courage to preach the righteous word of The Lord to hungry ears in desperate need of enlightenment. They offer the Cheese-Puff Gospel of What’s Happening Now. If the New York Times tells them the fashionable people want more mosques built, then all good Southern Baptists shall go forth and build mosques to the greater glory of Allah! And if the NYT fears the Alt-Right – get behind me Based Satan!

Cuck hard enough, and you are no longer a decent Christian. Cuck hard enough, and you are not even decent. Cuck hard enough and you will serve only one master. That master craves dead conservatives. Your “Christianity Convention” will produce whatever material that master requires to create more dead Conservatives. The SBC hath yeah verily imbibed of the cuck unto drunken folly. Cucked Southern Baptists now want more dead conservatives. What happened yesterday in Alexandria is exactly what any true believer would seek to do unto Satan.

* — Yep, SBC17 wants to help Lindsey make the bigots shut up. Come let us reason together….

Pagan Christianity

Monday, June 19th, 2017

The Right desperately needs to get right with God.

Perhaps not in the way most would think, this need arises from the confusion about the role of religion in the Right. Some want it to be the basis of the Right and to install a de facto theocracy; others see it as irrelevant; still others argue that conservatism is not based on a single method, as ideology is, and that religion is one part — perhaps not for all people — of a bundle of methods that together make a solution but are not in themselves solutions.

These seem to be prerequisites that can be accidentally made into ideologies. For example, racial and ethnic homogeneity is necessary for a thriving society, but in itself it is not a whole solution, only part of one. Similarly, deposing democracy and equality is a partial solution. Together these and other methods make up a complete society.

For that reason, it makes sense to view religion as not a solution in itself, but also something that at least many of us need. This gets us away from the theocracy that forces us all to become believers, and instead points to rule by culture, which requires strong nationalism to establish.

This takes us in turn to the question, which religion?

Varg Vikernes makes a compelling point for avoiding Christianity. It leads to Leftism, and conspired against our people in the past, not to mention creates the “personal morality” conditions which encourage virtue signaling. In his view, as in Nietzsche’s, it is entirely too pacifistic and fatalistic of a religion.

Onto this we might add one other shining elephant in the room: at least geographically — the Christianity Identity folks have some interesting input here on the origins of Biblical Jews — it is foreign, or simply put not European. The names are not in our languages, nor are the locations, or presumably many of the customs and values.

To this it is important to add that Christianity is also at least from a surface reading, which over time in the hands of large groups is what it will be streamlined to be, it is dualistic, or posits another world where the rules are more real than the rules in this one. In other words, logic is not logic; there is a different logic, more like a human logic, which is actually real.

DARG adds another failing of Christianity, which relates to the personal morality it champions:

The beginning of this is a clarification on the terms sacred and profane. Christianity has made [humans] believe that the sacred is themselves, and equivalent to “tolerance and love” (towards what they define as permissible, of course) and “feeling nice and warm”, and that the profane is everything that opposes that. How convenient. The more historical and philosophical stance, on the other hand, sees in the every-day world, and all that it holds, benign of malignant, as profane; and sees in the world of the exceptional, of man going beyond the merely human, the sacred.

The personal morality of Christianity, and its exoteric nature or tendency to behave like an ideological system more than a deep-learning skill, make it a mixed bag when it comes to religions. It is the great unifier, but that also means it simplifies the message.

Pagan faiths, on the other hand, are monistic — they believe there is no alternate set of rules for the universe, and that all that we need to know can be found in nature, science and logic — and esoteric, or formed of cumulative self-directed learning in which some are naturally gifted to go farther than others. Exotericism is inherently egalitarian; esotericism is innately hierarchical.

In fact, pagan faiths more resemble a philosophy and folkway with metaphysical implications than a religion, or organized spiritual dogma for the sake of shaping mass behavior:

This effort of combining all non-Christian religions under one umbrella was, in fact, a clever strategy by the early Christians to remove the “pagan” faiths altogether. Using the Norse traditions as an example, the Vikings of the early medieval period had no true name for their religious following. In truth, the word religion would have been an unknown, foreign term to them. The Nordic tribes preferred the word “customs” as—like the Greeks and Romans—their rituals, beliefs, and traditions were undefined and fluidly interpreted, orally passed down rather than rigidly studied. There was no all-encompassing word for the belief in the Aesir and Vanir, and the various other beings and deities the ancient Norse worshiped, and there was no written text discussing their practices until the Christian author Snorri Sturluson wrote their mythology down in the 13th century.

Now, the picture gets more complex because Christianity is mostly Pagan. It is clearly a derivative, or rather a compilation and synthesis of the indigenous faiths of lands the Jewish scribes were in contact with, featuring the Greeks whose philosophy they loved above all else. This means that there are Greek, Nordic, Hindu and other faiths retold in the Bible.

There was a reason why formerly “pagan” communities switched to Christianity, namely that it was both mostly familiar and more effective for manipulating herds of people. The exoteric nature of Christianity means that its symbols can be directly adjusted to cause people to behave one way or another. Some of this was positive, namely getting people to leave behind previous antisocial habits.

However, this displacement of the original faiths also led to cultural erasure. When a simpler and more easily understood version of a tradition comes along, especially one that is written, people simply adopt the new and forget the old, which most importantly contains the roadmap to understanding the reasons for the beliefs.

What this means however is that there is a bridge between pagan faiths and Christianity, and that for this reason, we can have faith that is not strictly entrenched in either one, only expressed through it, and that over time, this may change to the simpler and more internal, informal and naturalistic pagan ideation. Consider the Perennial nature of spirituality:

It also makes sense to have some form of metaphysical outlook, perhaps of a Perennialist nature:

At the core of the Perennial Philosophy we find four fundamental doctrines.

  1. The phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness — the world of things and animals and men and even gods — is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.
  2. Human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.
  3. Man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.
  4. Man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

If we distill religions to their core and take the intersection, we see a basic starting point that does not necessarily need formalization and, if kept informalized, loses its “human” projection and interpretation, and starts to resemble more the pagan faiths and even older Indo-European religion that our pre-Greek ancestors adopted.

This takes us away from religion as an external constraint that we adopt in order to shape ourselves and become a mass of people acting toward some goal, and reverts it to its original form, which is an observation about the nature of reality that reveals hints of the metaphysical embedded within nature:

As that great non-church and heterodox Christian Rudolf Steiner said: to disbelieve in God is to be, in a real sense, insane; in other words, it is to disbelieve any possibility of coherence, meaning and purpose – which is to regard all of life as a delusion.

…And to deny God within us and the world is to live earthly life in a state of detachment – since we can only observe and never actually participate in reality: we can never know.

In other words, religion is rediscovered by those with clarity of mind who can observe nature; this is the essence of transcendentalism, in which joy arises from understanding the nature of the world and seeing it in logic, therefore wisdom, and therefore beauty and a positive intention toward those of us caught in it, which in turn implies a life-like force to the universe, which per German Idealism — also found in Hinduism — is thought-like, dream-like or composed of thought or information.

In this way, we can see how for the West to rediscover the divine, Christianity must converge on the less formal and more intuitive forms of religious faith, which are the folk customs and existential search of the inner self that produces our classically reflective outlook.

Already we see signs of this. The Orthosphere-style thinkers tend either to embrace Catholicism, or outward-in, religious thinking, or to go the other way and embrace transcendentalism with discipline. This leads to a more naturalistic interpretation of religion that is naturally less obsessed with personality morality and its means-over-ends analysis.

Pagan Christianity, in addition to the Perennial Philosophy traits mentioned above per Aldous Huxley, also has a different map of the cosmos and metaphysical. At its core, this represents a shift from three paths (Father, Son, Holy Ghost) to four:

  1. Information-Space
  2. Godhead
  3. God
  4. Gods

In this mythos, the natural order of a universe comprised of information comes first, and with it the notion that we each have a role to serve determined by our logical placement within this order. Natural law and logic come first, and within them there are other spaces.

Godhead is the animating force of all that we know and the most essential tendencies of the universe. This works within the information-space, shaping us toward the divine and influencing the birth of the gods.

At the top, there is an all-encompassing God which represents holiness itself and less of an active personality than a tendency, like gravity or rain, to order the universe into beauty by balancing darkness and light so that existence itself can prevail. Since the universe is relative, darkness is necessary to emphasize light, much like death gives significance to life.

Below that are the gods, or animistic forces with distinct personalities. These are manifested forces which act according to their own interest, which means that we can respect them without expecting them to judge us or treat us according to some moral standard of our own. They simply do what they do, but they reflect the spirit of godhead, and so are divine while bridging to the profane world of the mundane.

At the bottom are the creatures of Earth and beyond, including humans and plants, who exhibit spirit of their own. These are able to partake in divinity by seeking transcendence and avoiding hubris, but will never fully know what is on the other side because they are limited to a perspective of the physical and individualized.

Perhaps that is enough of a start for now. We have seen how Christianity and Paganism are not that much different, how they share a core, and how we can rediscover that core by starting from reality itself. As with all esoteric things, that represents a doorway opened, and a path upon which each of us will journey a different distance, often down different tributaries.

How Religion May Tear The Right Apart, Again

Thursday, June 15th, 2017

Over at Red Ice, Reinhard Wolff writes a great summary of how operant paradigm shifts produce new ages of history and the challenges to nationalist and traditionalist thinkers from that front:

With that in mind, it’s obvious that we need a new ideology – one that offers room for different religious inclinations.

This new mythos based on the fundamental laws of nature – hierarchy, identity, differentiation, upward evolution and struggle, to name a few. For regardless which stances one takes on metaphysical issues, the laws of nature reign supreme in this world, and civilizations that fall out of the natural order are doomed. This new ideology must support virtue and promotes excellence, strength, beauty, and honor. Most importantly, it must be able to transcend our differences.

Categories can baffle and befuddle us. More important than a particular religion, or even the choice of religion, is our desire to be good. The root of both conservatism and religion is found in a desire to be part of an order larger than the self; this requires enough maturation to stop being fascinated by desires, drama and attention.

That in turn requires a desire to be good, which in turn necessitates realism so that we know what will be good in reality by achieving good results. This forces a split from most religion and politics, which focuses on defining certain methods as good instead of focusing on whether the cumulative results of our actions produce something good and enduring.

In that sense, we do not need an ideology, but a cultural agreement that we wish to be good by doing good, and that religion may have a role in this but only where compatible. Religions will experiencing a type of editing through re-interpretation via this process, and through this, something curious will happen.

While we await the symbolism of a religion of the new age, we do not disagree on content, which is converging more on the pagan than the Christian. The pagan faiths — nature beliefs, not human ones; unwritten, not written; practiced, not theorized — are not the stories of the gods, but a general outlook that includes a belief in a natural hierarchy into which humanity fits and human individuals fit unequally.

If the Alt Right and related movements have a core, it is a rejection of the fundamental idea of The Enlightenment,™ which is that “man is the measure of all things.” Our focus instead is on reality, and how nature plus the divine is the measure of all things, including human survival. That “meta-religion” defines our future more than a specific denomination can.

Bernie Sanders Demonstrates That Leftists Hate Christianity

Thursday, June 8th, 2017

Senator (((Bernie Sanders))) now claims I am un-Amerikan. He thinks I believe some crazy, intolerant stuff. Here’s one example of the crazy.

Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

It’s foundational to being Christian. Unless you got baptized only because you really needed a shower, or were born again because your momma did a pretty sorry job of it the first time. Here’s a pretty fair-minded non-believer’s description of the theology at stake (perhaps waiting to be burned by nut-job SWPLs and SJWs).

Sanders is trying to frame that as bigotry towards religious minorities like Muslims and Jews, but no doubt Russell Vought would say the same of me and the rest of the country’s many, many millions of irreligious people. Embrace Christ or damnation awaits. That’s Christianity 101.

I’ll extend things a little further without loss of generality. Everyone who isn’t saved is damned. To quote the great moral philosopher, Annie Lennox. “I was born an original sinner. I was born in original sin.” If she really didn’t mess with the missionary man, she was liable to feel the burn. Bernie decides to light up Russell Voight, a Trump nominee for a government position, (and make him feel the BERNNN) for his Christian beliefs below.

Sanders (shouting): I understand you are a Christian, but this country are made of people who are not just — I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?

Vought: Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that’s how I should treat all individuals . . .

Sanders: You think your statement that you put into that publication, they do not know God because they rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned, do you think that’s respectful of other religions?

Vought: Senator, I wrote a post based on being a Christian and attending a Christian school that has a statement of faith that speaks clearly in regard to the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation.

Sanders: I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about.

And then the whole Christianist thing threatens his self-assumed, egocentric monopoly on brotherlove.

“Teacher, what is the most important commandment in the Law?”

Jesus answered: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind. This is the first and most important commandment. The second most important commandment is like this one. And it is, “Love others as much as you love yourself.”

All the Law of Moses and the Books of the Prophets[a] are based on these two commandments.

That gets run run through the logic ringer between the time when Christ talks to Thomas and when Jesus gives up the ghost. If you follow The Lord’s premises you reach an unmistakeable conclusion known as The Great Commission. Here’s how it all works.

  1. You are commanded to love your neighbor.
  2. All people not following Jesus are going to burn in Hell.
  3. .: If you are basically decent at all you “…go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”

According Pew Research, 70% of the US Population is at least nominally Christian. This means they at least give lip-service to the concept of original sin and like Nicodemus, need to receive intervention to avoid eternal perdition. So out of a population of 320 million, Senator Sanders has now publically declared approximately 224 Million of them Un-Amerikan.

So WWJD with someone who is this big of a gaping cloaca maxima and who refused to repent? Perhaps The Meat Puppets offer us profound theological insight as to what happens to that sort of a Cis-Gender, White, Heteronormative Bigot in the jolly old dope-ride known as the hereafter.

How Religion Shattered The Leadership Of The West And Let Leftism In

Monday, June 5th, 2017

It does not make sense to blame Christianity for the downfall of the West; the real story is more nuanced.

Christianity was taken up by the rising Left as a means of spreading individualism. Any religion where the choice of the individual to partake is considered a complete introduction to the depth of the faith will naturally become a vehicle for projection, which is why the Catholic church continued the Rabbinical tradition of isolating scholarship to those who had already demonstrated prowess.

This elitist viewpoint is called esotericism, meaning that it is based on mysteries and not memorization. Topics are seen through a qualitative lens that views them as having depth, such that their initial summary in language is a gateway to a series of cause-effect relationships and their implications. The more one learns, the more there is to learn.

Esotericism also relies on logical collisions to determine boundaries, instead of categories. The opposite of esotericism, exotericism, teaches through categories, where a single detail stands for the whole and is presumed to impart that characteristic uniformly to all objects within the category. This provides an easier method of thinking, thus a more popular one.

Logical boundaries on the other hand occur when the thinker looks into the depth of an idea through its extension to a logical extreme and the implications of that, in infinite cycle. This resembles the thinking of a chess player, looking ahead as many moves as possible by accounting for every potential move by the other player. In this view, objects have many details, and it is important to take the interaction of objects with other objects on a case-by-case basis, seeing how the details collide and coincide to determine the nature of those objects. This gives humans less perceived power through an easy method of thinking, but is more accurate.

Christianity suffered weakness because it was based on the Word. The Word first appears in the creation of the world, and then extends as a theme in the Bible through people accepting word tokens as literal truth, without having depth to work through, implying an equality of all people in understanding. This approach lends itself to propaganda.

At first this was an advantage to Christianity. It could induct and unite huge groups of people quickly, which is why the pagan faiths faded away; they simply could not compete. As a theology derived mostly from the Greeks, early Christianity conveyed a strong Indo-European philosophy. But its strengths were also its weaknesses, making it easy to take over from within.

Some claim the rise of Protestantism was part of this process, but it may have been resistance to the effect that having the Bible widely available in lay languages was having within Catholicism.

This upheaval resurrected an old conflict that had lain dormant throughout the middle ages. Before the preceding millennial turn, Throne and Alter had been in conflict as the monarchies of Europe found themselves needing allies during war, and in addition to domestic splintered politics, having to placate special interest groups. The Church too often played as a self-interested party.

With the middle ages, this condition was suspended as some parity was reached and Church and monarchy could work together. However, this was short-lived, as Christianity proliferated into different cults with the rise of mass distribution of the Bible, in part pre-dating the printing press as the supply of hand-copied Bibles accumulated over the years.

At that point, a new internal religious conflict began, one that would eventually give rise to the nascent Leftism of The Enlightenment™ and the Romantic period:

In Cavanaugh’s The Myth of Religious Violence, Cavanaugh presents a thesis which is radically at odds with received wisdom concerning the origin of the secular state. Citing the examples of Baruch Spinoza,Thomas Hobbes and John Locke who presented religious division[ii] as the cause of the conflicts of the period, he notes that this narrative provided:

…the backdrop for much of the Enlightenment’s critique of religion. There developed a grand narrative in Enlightenment historiography — typified by Edward Gibbon and Voltaire — that saw the wars of religion as the last gasp of medieval barbarism and fanaticism before the darkness was dispelled.

More modern liberal thinkers have subsequently traced the birth of liberalism to the so-called religious conflicts of this period, with Cavanaugh citing Quintin Skinner, Jeffrey Stout, Judith Shklar and John Rawls as exemplifying this narrative.

When a conflict of this sort arises, more likely what happens is that one party was neutralized, allowing some event to take place. The “fanaticism” of the medieval era was an attempt to retain balance between different power structures within civilization, because they remembered what happened to Athens, Rome and pre-medieval Europe.

If instead of viewing the religious wars as a conflict between religion and anti-religion, but a struggle for power within civilization, we see that an unnamed third force won: egalitarianism.

As Cavanaugh takes pains to point out, the institutional changes which were supposed to have been ushered in as a result of the religious conflicts actually presaged them. To bolster his argument he provides ample examples of conflict occurring between states with the same denominations, as well as collaboration between differing denominations. The most trenchant observation is provided by the example of Martin Luther:

As Richard Dunn points out, “Charles V’s soldiers sacked Rome, not Wittenberg, in 1527, and when the papacy belatedly sponsored a reform program, both the Habsburgs and the Valois refused to endorse much of it, rejecting especially those Trentine decrees which encroached on their sovereign authority.” The wars of the 1520s were part of the ongoing struggle between the pope and the emperor for control over Italy and over the church in German territories.

In other words, while the Church struggled against the kings, someone else took power. This became The Enlightenment,™ which had fortunate timing in that it caught the early years of the industrial revolution within a century and, because it perfectly justified unlimited growth and tragedy of the commons, replaced religion with the new mythos of the individual.

For this reason, “Christianity caused Leftism” is too simple of an analysis, just like “Christianity is the root of Western Civilization.” The root of Western Civilization is its people, but they depend on quality leadership from the aristocracy in order to be effective. We removed that, and now we are removing our own people so that it can never be reborn.

Idealism And Platonic Forms

Friday, June 2nd, 2017

the patterning of trees, fuck communism

To reconstruct the West, we need a will to be good; this requires some understanding of what good is, and how in a long-term sense it is more beneficial for us to embrace good than the convenient and short-sighted, often referred to as “evil.”

That in turn requires recognizing that what the crowd refers to as “good” is evil and vice-versa, because knowing their own tendency toward evil and venality, they make an ideal of those behaviors in order to avoid criticism for them by those that know better.

This places us in a strange place: we exist in a wasteland where nothing is true and everything is suspect, but are seeking an occult or hidden truth of what is actually real, despite it being right in front of us. We are fighting the mental spam created by the needs and chatter of other human beings.

In addition, we recognize the bias of this time toward the present tense, because it has no future and fears any consequences of its actions. Hence an entire range of thought, from long-term practicality to metaphysics, has been made taboo by the agitation of the herd.

A bias toward the present tense will inevitably favor tangible and material objects over long-term predictions, such as the knowledge of patterns in reality that lead to outcomes far removed from their origins. Present tense recognizes only conditions of objects already existing where their properties determine outcomes, like a match producing fire but not the production of flame itself.

This leads us to questions of cause and effect. What is the cause, the material object or the pattern? Plato says the latter, and he finds support in modern religious thinkers as well:

As Ransom is told in Lewis’s novel, Perelandra, ‘You see only an appearance, small one. You have never seen more than an appearance of anything,’ and he sadly realises, ‘I have lived all my life among shadows and broken images.’

What we think of as tangible and firm objects, being the causes of themselves and having the end goals of themselves, are in fact the least solid part of the process: they are the effect, and the cause is elsewhere, probably in a bigger and more complex formation than that which we think of as physical reality or, at least, immediate physical reality.

Pattern, principle and natural laws — from gravity through human hierarchy — are more solid than the positions we are in now. We are fragile beings, prone to die at any moment or falter as our bodies or souls weaken, but the order of nature prevails over time, more statistically than in the instant. Our tendency is to confuse its momentary abeyance for an exception that proves its invalidity, when inf act the exception proves the rule.

Let us revisit perhaps the most profound thinker the West has produced, Plato, on the nature of reality:

Behold! human beings living in a underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets.

I see.
And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them are talking, others silent.

You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.
Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave?

True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they were never allowed to move their heads?

And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would only see the shadows?

Yes, he said.
And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?

Very true.
And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing shadow?

No question, he replied.
To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.

Plato describes the inversion effected by reality here: we confuse what we see for the truth of reality, when in fact we are seeing the effect and the cause requires discovery, like solving a mystery, debugging a computer problem, inventing a new algorithm or tracing a fault in a line. Our minds select the weakest link in the chain, the manifestation or instance, and confuse it with the essence or cause.

With this in mind, we can see the wisdom of German Idealism: all in the world is thought or thought-like, because thought operates on the level of patterns and not pure material this-thing-hit-that-thing style thinking. For the golf ball to hit the distant hole, the swing must be of the right pattern, the ball balanced on the tee, the wind at certain levels, and many other factors in balance. It is not as simple as bashing a ball with a club.

Following up the previous part one and part two of this series, this article explores the foundations of European faith.

We know from Perennialism that there is an Ur-faith to all religions which believes that there is a cause beyond the immediate material reality; this takes both an agnostic form, in which patterning over time is more important than reality, and a monistic one, where the metaphysical is seen as a layer or level enclosing our material reality and producing its patterns and results. However, in all of these, the sane believe that this is an order based on nihilistic consistency, or logical actions independent of human desires and perceptions, and therefore is not of the primitive superstitious mysticism that blights third world nations.

A European religion will be like that: unconcerned with individuals, patterned in cycles and forces, and based on the idea that information and order are more important than material substrate. It will thus be Idealistic and Traditionalist, but not in the most common forms of these now, which apply modern superstition — either scientism or fundamentalism — to that which is essentially a logical and logically consistent process independent of our human monkey wishes.

The idea that there is a pattern beyond but manifested in the material might be called animism, or the idea that life has a form as a whole, and that this translates into events rather than those events arising linearly from previous events or material properties. Animism is the idea that life itself is alive and that living things are logical in the way thoughts are logical, meaning that they cast about for possible meanings and then choose the best, rather than being “objective” and “rational” in the way of humans approaching real-time decisions as if they were made in a lab.

Because the natural world is seen as sentient, for an animistic thinker significant events don’t ‘just happen’ – like inert billiard balls bouncing-off one another – instead events occur because some entity wants them to occur. For the animist, every significant event is intentional, every significant event has personal implications.

…The problem is that, for a modern adult, recovery of animistic thinking entails undoing the effects of an exceptionally thorough and prolonged process of socialisation that has buried animism under a vast superstructure of repressions. Modern adults cannot necessarily recover their animistic thoughts at will, even temporarily.

Methods used to help in the recovery of animistic modes of thinking have been known since the Romantic era. They essentially involve detachment from the social systems that tend to maintain objectivity and rationality. For example, solitude (away from people), leisure (away from the economy) and unstructured time (as contrasted with technologically-measured time). Direct contact with nature is another classic strategy. Under such conditions of societal detachment there tends to be a spontaneous resurgence of animistic thinking – and those who can achieve detachment, often strive to do so.

In other words, animism is the original condition of humankind and is obscured by the necessity of maintaining a civilization where most people cannot understand it, therefore need to be manipulated (a form of “control”) via carrot-and-stick style judgments. When we escape the modern world, we are able to see the original truth, and this points us not toward momentary adaptations as economic thinking does, but toward eternal paths toward clarity within ourselves, and through that knowledge of prescriptive use of those material truths so that they can serve cosmic or timeless truths (where “truth” means “a more accurate interpretation of reality relative to other human options”).

The main problem with the Christian interpretation of this is that Christianity is based on the Word, which forms a proxy for reality itself, and as a result it is quickly gamed by Crowdists, who turn it into a dualistic faith or one based on two worlds: (1) the physical world we know, and (2) a spiritual world where things are as they actually are, or are perfected. The problem with this is that it naturally creates a bias against reality because it is perceived as the physical world, and if the other world is perfect, then the physical world is wrong, broken or otherwise unimportant. Second, it encourages people to project their desires into this spiritual world because there is no data for how it actually works, so it becomes a manifestation of human intent rather than a reflection of the type of dry logical consistency we see in nature. Christianity takes on a “New Age” interpretation because people see in this “pure” world the idea of ideology, which is that in that world, things operate as they “should” according to human lowest common denominator desires, which reflect weakness more than reason and sensibility.

Animism relies heavily on the same mechanism as Idealism, which is a union between mental state and world, taking the ancient concept of intentionality to a level of ontology, or means of understanding the world:

In medieval logic and philosophy, the Latin word intentio was used for what contemporary philosophers and logicians nowadays call a ‘concept’ or an ‘intension’: something that can be both true of non-mental things and properties—things and properties lying outside the mind—and present to the mind.

Intentionality defines our relationship with reality and provides for us the basis of understanding Idealism. This definition is a complex way of saying that our mental concepts do not necessarily align with what is in the world, and that thoughts can be logically true without being true-in-fact, and that for that reason, our primary quest in philosophy is to figure out which concepts are accurate, which becomes difficult when there is not an external object to which they can relate. In animism, the world operates according to conceptual principles, which means that the mind can discipline itself to find the inner properties of external objects and from that, discover their actual nature as opposed to their merely-intentional or purely conceptual nature.

As a result, the ancient faiths were forms of monism or a belief that no matter what metaphysical layers exist on top of this world, the logical rules derived from this world also applied to those “worlds”:

Vedānta is nominally a school of Indian philosophy, although in reality it is a label for any hermeneutics that attempts to provide a consistent interpretation of the philosophy of the Upaniṣads or, more formally, the canonical summary of the Upaniṣads, Bādarāyaņa’s Brahma Sūtra. Advaita is often translated as “non-dualism” though it literally means “non-secondness.”

…According to Advaita metaphysics, Brahman—the ultimate, transcendent and immanent God of the latter Vedas—appears as the world because of its creative energy (māyā). The world has no separate existence apart from Brahman. The experiencing self (jīva) and the transcendental self of the Universe (ātman) are in reality identical (both are Brahman), though the individual self seems different as space within a container seems different from space as such. These cardinal doctrines are represented in the anonymous verse “brahma satyam jagan mithya; jīvo brahmaiva na aparah” (Brahman is alone True, and this world of plurality is an error; the individual self is not different from Brahman). Plurality is experienced because of error in judgments (mithya) and ignorance (avidya).

Humans break down any faith according to what is convenient for the human mental state, which generally involves that which requires the least discipline of the inner impulses and external behaviors of the self for intangible reasons. People will change in order to make money, make friends or gain social status, but when told they must change in order to be aligned with the order of nature that offers them no tangible reward, they tend to resist this and instead retreat into the world of their own thoughts, thoughts shared with others through language, and physical objects including the management thereof such as economics. This is the human world; it is easy to rely on, and it requires nothing of the individual but participation in nominal events such as jobs, social interaction and shopping.

For these reasons, much as we escape modern institutions because they are tainted with human illusions, the same must be applied to religion. Our goal is to discover the Idealism within Animism and through that, to understand the purpose of religion outside of its external trappings — work hard, be nice to other people, say the magic words — and through that, to rediscover how our inner goodness can find an outlet in religion for understanding the task of life.

In this light, the question is not so much Christianity or Paganism, but how to find in each the parts that fit with our task of spiritual revival in the West. Whichever one we use will eventually return to this original religion because people now have a memory of distrust for organized, formal and written religion. The result of this uncertainty will be a return to the pagan outlook, no matter what religion was chosen, of encoding belief in ritual and custom, not word and law.

Recommended Reading